Debate on Validity of Religion (split from "Christians" thread)

[Regal]

Logic > faith.

 

[Regal]

I realize you probably posted this simply to start an argument, but assuming that someone who has faith in God rejects logic is no less ignorant then your statement implies the religious are.

Not at all. I was just giving my thoughts on the matter of religion. Granted it was simplified but you get the idea.

 

[Mash]

Not at all. I was just giving my thoughts on the matter of religion. Granted it was simplified but you get the idea.

The matter wasn't about the validity of religion, however.

It was a discussion between members of a particular religion, about a particular religion.

 

[TheTickleMonster]

Not at all. I was just giving my thoughts on the matter of religion. Granted it was simplified but you get the idea.

The matter wasn't about the validity of religion, however.

It was a discussion between members of a particular religion, about a particular religion.

Mash is right. Your post is invalid in this thread, Xephidel. The original poster was asking who all the Christians are, not what people thought of Christianity. She was just curious who were Christians on this site. Therefore, your post does seem like you were trying to start an argument since you weren't answering the OPs question, you were stating your opinion on religion.

 

[Regal]

The matter wasn't about the validity of religion, however.

It was a discussion between members of a particular religion, about a particular religion.

It's always about the validity.

 

[dentrag1231]

No, it's not. Right now, it's about who is Christian, and how they become such. Literally the first sentence of the topic states this isn't a religious debate, so it is not in any way about the validity.

 

[Regal]

No, it's not. Right now, it's about who is Christian, and how they become such. Literally the first sentence of the topic states this isn't a religious debate, so it is not in any way about the validity.

Funny that you called me ignorant then post that.

 

[Mash]

It's always about the validity.

No, it's not.

It's only always about the validity for the people who are so insecure about their own beliefs that they feel the need to self-validate at every opportunity they can.

 

[Regal]

No, it's not.

It's only always about the validity for the people who are so insecure about their own beliefs that they feel the need to self-validate at every opportunity they can.

That's cute.

 

[Mash]

Hey, the truth hurts sometimes.

 

[Regal]

Hey, the truth hurts sometimes.

If the truth does indeed hurt then why don't I feel anything?

 

[Mash]

Oh, well, in that case we can probably call it denial.

 

[Regal]

That's a nice assumption bro.

 

[Mash]

Well, considering the lack of credible information you've given to back up any of your arguments, all you've left me with are assumptions.

 

[Regal]

I imagine it would be more akin to a rant than an actual argument.

 

[snipes20081]

I don't quite think I understand... Hang on, I'll be right back.


Debate: Contention in argument; dispute, controversy; discussion; esp. the discussion of questions of public interest in Parliament or in any assembly

Source

Now, assuming we can consider this thread an "assembly" of sorts, then I can safely say that there is no debate to be found here.

There is no contention in argument, just someone pretending to be "cool" beyond the wall of animosity that the internet provides. The user COULD go do research and contest anyone's views, but they will instead just stand on the hill that they have made for themselves and laugh at all others who pass by, claiming that the ground he stands on is better than the ground anyone else stands on.

In short, move along and try not to feed the trolls. They grow so fast and tend to multiply if you place them in water... or something.

 

[Regal]

Hey, I'm sure Mash 16 is a cool dude. Just look at all that edgy-ness.

 

[Mash]

Mm, case in point.

 

[xodlirv1]

I think religion is a very emotional subject for many people; and this prevents them from examining it logically. If one could detach themselves emotionally from religion, any religion, and examine it in a reasonable, emotionless light, I think they'd realize it makes very little sense.

 

[Regal]

I think religion is a very emotional subject for many people; and this prevents them from examining it logically. If one could detach themselves emotionally from religion, any religion, and examine it in a reasonable, emotionless light, I think they'd realize it makes very little sense.

Well put.

 

[Mash]

I think religion is a very emotional subject for many people; and this prevents them from examining it logically. If one could detach themselves emotionally from religion, any religion, and examine it in a reasonable, emotionless light, I think they'd realize it makes very little sense.

You can say that for any aspect of culture, to be perfectly honest.

Take clothing as a good example. Clothing's only objective purpose is to protect us from the cold. So, when people wear clothing on warm days, they're really not making any sense. However, we as a culture have established that we view nudity in a public setting as taboo, so we've thrown away objectivity in favor of continuing to do what we consider 'normal'.

That applies to religion, in its own way. I'm a well-established atheist, and while I understand that religion doesn't make any objective sense, I also understand that it serves a purpose within our culture.

In the end, so long as Religion isn't negatively affecting you, why bother making a big deal out of it? Let the people who want to believe believe, and reserve your instruction for the people who don't. More than anything else, people should be allowed to think for themselves, and not have any idea pushed on them, whether that idea be the belief in a higher power, or the disbelief in one.

 

[Regal]

It does serve a purpose. Just not a good one.

 

[Mash]

Trying to put any objective value on the merit of a purpose within a culture is a pretty pointless action.

As I demonstrated, there are a lot of things we do that don't serve a good purpose, yet we still continue to do them nonetheless.

 

[xodlirv1]

In the end, so long as Religion isn't negatively affecting you, why bother making a big deal out of it?

Because it is negatively affecting me and every other American, as long as bigots use it as the excuse for their own hatreds and prejudices. Every time political issues such as homosexual rights, stem cell research, or meaningful sex education in schools come up for debate, what arguments are trotted out against them?

 

[Mash]

Because it is negatively affecting me and every other American, as long as bigots use it as the excuse for their own hatreds and prejudices. Every time political issues such as homosexual rights, stem cell research, or meaningful sex education in schools come up for debate, what arguments are trotted out against them?

Religious ones, obviously.

And in those situations, I fully encourage the use of logic and reason to point out the flaws in the arguments of the people that are against such things.

However, that's not really Religion affecting you, is it? The idea of Religion is much more than just belief in Christianity or Islam, or Buddhism. And while individual religions might impose commandments or self-righteous nonsense that affect our day to day lives, that doesn't mean that Religion doesn't server an important purpose in our culture, and it certainly doesn't mean that we can afford to get rid of it at present.

There are friends of mine that would be absolutely lost without religion. It's a character trait that I constantly raise an eyebrow at, but it's there nonetheless. They've developed a need for a personal relationship with their god, and taking that away would probably destroy them.

While Religion has done a lot of horrible things in the name of their god, you can't deny that it's done plenty of good, as well. I mean, we can all say that Science is probably the most important thing that we as a species have grown to embrace, yet it can also be argued that science has brought plenty of pain, suffering, and death along with the amazing medical and technological benefits. That doesn't mean we should just get rid of it, though.